By Benjamin Clarysse

17 Jul 2025

Only a permit with adequate conditions for nitrogen, noise and climate, among others, can provide legal certainty. Simply dusting off the existing permit would obviously be inappropriate and cynical.

The Council for Permit Disputes today annulled the environmental permit for Brussels Airport because of procedural errors. Bond Beter Leefmilieu is pleased that this puts the operation of the airport back on the political radar, but disappointed that the Council did not address the substantive arguments. It is now up to the Flemish government to do its homework thoroughly: only by addressing the impact on health, nature and climate will a permit become legally certain.

The Council for Permit Disputes annulled the permit based on the appeal filed by Brussels Airlines. The Council ruled that the required procedure for imposing operating restrictions, the so-called ‘balanced approach’ was not followed correctly. However, the operation of the airport remains possible until 2029 to allow the Flemish government to go through the correct procedure.

So the Council did not address the substantive objections of the environmentalists and local residents. That is a pity, because they are about the essence. “The ultimate goal is a well-founded and future-proof permit, with conclusive guarantees in terms of health, climate and environment. This is not only in the interest of the 109,000 people living in the neighbourhood who suffer severe sleep disturbance; the airport also benefits from a legally secure framework,” says Benjamin Clarysse, policy coordinator at Bond beter Leefmilieu.

It is now up to the Flemish government to thoroughly redo its homework. Crucially, it should not only assume growth at all costs, but also other scenarios, which do guarantee the health of the environment.

The licensing of Schiphol airport proves that an operating restriction because of noise pollution is possible. Bond Beter Leefmilieu is counting on the Flemish government to take maximum account of the interests of local residents, the environment and the climate in its ‘balanced approach’.

For example, research shows that a reduction of night flights, in which neighbouring airports have already preceded us, hardly costs any jobs and can even lead to more quality jobs. It is high time to listen to the High Health Council and consider this phase-out thoroughly. Only a permit with adequate conditions for, among other things, nitrogen, noise and climate can provide legal certainty. Simply dusting off the existing permit would obviously be inappropriate.